My Natops is smaller than your Natops...

[A4sForever]

Consider yourselves 'lucky' ... when I started on the WHALE ... we had 4 manuals (systems, SOP, performance, quick reference normals/emergency ... got it down to 3 manuals .... but if you were qualed on more than one bird at the same time ... Oh, MOMMY ...

 

[Goober]

I'm not sure how it was when you were here Fester, but they split the NFOs into Group 2 or HE2K classes.

Pilots get a "Series Qual" and learn all variants. From the pilot end, the difference is not that huge but can bite you in the ass on some EPs.

That's because there's little/no difference (maybe a few minors) between all remaining variants in the front end. Only 2 places left to see a real-live Group II (RAG and Fallon), and even then there's only a few. Everyone else is Nav Upgrade, MCU/ACIS, or HE2K. With everyone on 8 blades now, the only other mystery is the Garmin upgrade; and most squadrons have that too.

The NFO's used to be series qual, but with the syllabus revision we're finding it saves a considerable amount of time to train by splitting them again (as it used to be with Grp 0 vs Grp II models). No point in teaching systems and specs on something a new guy will likely never fly (I "can" make you learn CAINS, but why would I and what would it gain you). INFOs will continue to be series qual'ed along with guys going to a couple of squadrons due to transition in the next year or so, but that's it for the double-anchor crowd. Unit evals are going to be model-specific in the future. Again, a matter of reducing the "I know something you don't know"/"stump the chump games of yore.

 

[Uncle Fester]

The series qual for FO's was hitting the street right as I was in my last six months in the Fleet, and the biggest heartburn we-all had with it was having to learn the G2/Grim Reaper scope stuff. My RAG class was the first to do the G2-HE2K split up front, as opposed to a differences class post-stan check, so by the time this came around, none of the JO's in my squadron had so much as seen a CIS scope, much less ever played with one. Nor were we ever likely to need to use the knowledges, so this seemed like an enormous redass to no discernable purpose.

I still don't see the point to making One Big NATOPS. I still also don't get why they can't designate new versions in a T/M/S with letters instead of program acronyms, unless it's a way to make big programs sound less-big to Congress. "No, Senator, it's just an equipment upgrade."

I think we once figured up that if they moved the E-2 up a letter every time they made a major change to the plane, we should be on the E-2G or E-2H by now.

 

[Goober]

The series qual for FO's was hitting the street right as I was in my last six months in the Fleet, and the biggest heartburn we-all had with it was having to learn the G2/Grim Reaper scope stuff. My RAG class was the first to do the G2-HE2K split up front, as opposed to a differences class post-stan check, so by the time this came around, none of the JO's in my squadron had so much as seen a CIS scope, much less ever played with one. Nor were we ever likely to need to use the knowledges, so this seemed like an enormous redass to no discernable purpose.

I still don't see the point to making One Big NATOPS. I still also don't get why they can't designate new versions in a T/M/S with letters instead of program acronyms, unless it's a way to make big programs sound less-big to Congress. "No, Senator, it's just an equipment upgrade."

I think we once figured up that if they moved the E-2 up a letter every time they made a major change to the plane, we should be on the E-2G or E-2H by now.

Most of it stemmed from the thought that with all the flip-flopping of variants between squadrons, you never knew what you might be flying the next year or so [case in point: 117 went from GII to MCU to HE2K in three years]. At the time, there also wasn't an HE2K sim to be had...anywhere.

As for the NATOPS, I couldn't agree more. Not only can you find what you're looking for, but you know that everything in your particular pub is pertinent to YOUR airframe. You won't see C-Hornet guys flipping through a pub and weeding out the SH stuff. Call me a purist, but it worked just fine that way when it was Grp0 and GrpII.

The reasoning behind the same series letter for everyone (officially, they're ALL E-2C's) was to avoid the full-tilt stem-to-stern flight test requirements and costs associated with a new model. If it's just an AFC/ECP, then no new regimen is required. Considering it didn't change the weight/balance or flight characteristics dramatically, new engines got it the + (for GrpII and NU), computers and scopes got it MCU/ACIS, and the full upgrade with CEC got it the HE2K tags. Much cheaper and faster than a complete test/eval bill.

The D model is another story...altogether. ["the D model is another story"]